Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2018 July 12

< July 11	July 13 >

July 12[edit]

File:Forest Cobra.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uploader is claiming to be the copyright holder. There is no EXIF data on this image. The uploader has engaged in deliberate copyright violations with images now deleted where he uploaded images claiming they were from his mobile phone but were in fact the images were copied for the internet but reversed and cropped, presumably to evade detection through reverse image searching, Whpq (talk) 00:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:AlaskaHallOfGovernors.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of presumably copyrighted photos. —innotata 04:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My theory in uploading this was, and is, that the distance from each individual photo, combined with the odd angle and the many reflections of light in the room, made the potential for copyright violation negligible. The image is intended to convey the historical progression of governors, not any individual one. Perhaps I should have uploaded it under a fair use license, and I would have no objection if it were switched to that. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:47, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Incidental appearance of copyrighted material can be allowable, but this is a photo where the subject is a set of copyrighted works. I highly doubt this qualifies for non-free use, don't see how it's essential and fits any non-free content criteria. —innotata 15:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Stjosephs.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Needs better sourcing; was this really taken by Anthony Dimond in the course of any official duties as a federal government employee? —innotata 04:22, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Tuzigoot from valley below.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The quoted email from the author just grants permission for use on Wikipedia, not a release into the public domain or under a free license as we require for free images. (Also if there was a proper release it should have be sent to WP:OTRS, which I believe was already required when this was uploaded.) —innotata 04:33, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Metropolitan Stadium aerial.JPG[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this non-free image needed when the public domain File:Metropolitan Stadium 1962.jpeg also exists? As you can see not that many readily visible changes were made between 1962 and 1981. —innotata 04:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:NFCC#1 as there is a free image available as pointed out in the nomination. -- Whpq (talk) 17:18, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bryant Neighborhood Sign.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Probably copyrighted photo of definitely copyrighted sign. The uploader (permanently blocked) implied he didn't take the photo, and made the claim that "my mother actually designed the content, so she is the copyright holder of the sign" but no more details provided. —innotata 04:48, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Craig MacGregor and Charlie Huhn.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Permission is not granted for all reuses and redistribution including commercially, so this is not public domain or any other class of free content for our purposes. —innotata 06:59, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Cyanophage infecting cyanobacteria.gif[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence of permission at the YouTube video, which is clearly not the original source of this animation. —innotata 07:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Francesco Alberoni 003.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear from the description who the author is. —innotata 07:26, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 12:33, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:H&R Factory Postcard.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Probably public domain, but with no date or other such details, this cannot be confirmed. —innotata 07:41, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:325 Bowery at Second Street, The Tin Palace Windows on the Bowery placard.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence of permission from creator of this flyer - or from creators of the copyrighted images used in it, presumably including a record label. —innotata 08:01, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Annie old.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No explanation given of how this image is public domain. —innotata 08:08, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Ahmed Hussen House of Commons.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Works of the Canadian Parliament are not automatically public domain as far as I know. —innotata 08:24, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 12:33, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Obvious copyright violation. See "© House of Commons 2015". Not only the photographs of the HoC are not in the public domain, but the HoC refused to allow their free licensing in the cases when they were actually asked by Wikimedia users. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Ed Forchion April 2016 mug shot.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted mugshot with no fair use rationale, and that probably does not qualify for fair use they are of living people. There's also the argument that copyright in mugshots is unconstitutional appended, but no court has ruled such (or been asked to) as far as I know. —innotata 08:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Frog smile.gif[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not clear that the website is the original source of the animation or the photo used to make it. —innotata 08:34, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My research prior to download did not reveal a potential copyvio - there was nothing else like it online prior to the date Gabriel uploaded it on June 27, 2012, and only 2 subsequent instances since, excluding the upload here. There are actually 3 sites linking to/from the Daily Beautiful Gifs site at Animated pix which is linked to their FB page, and to the Arts & Humanities FB page where a variety of artists/animators participate. I agree that those sites lack the customary licensing formalities we're accustomed to seeing at Pixabay or Flickr, but considering the web hosts (Google & FaceBook) are sensitive to copyvio, the gif has existed on those sites since 2012 as 100% free. ^{Atsme📞📧} 17:24, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS: thought this chart might be handy. ^{Atsme📞📧} 17:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google Image search finds a use of the GIF from 2008, and it's unlikely the GIF's creator (whoever that is) took the photos. Also, there's no statement that the GIF website is CC-zero anyway. Social media and GIF sites host a lot of copyright violations to say the least, and they can host images that are fair use, which Wikipedia chooses not to except where particularly useful for articles. —innotata 18:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, the wordpress site sheds some new light on it for me. Since the image is stripped of all identifying meta data, the animation blogger could just as easily add a CC0 tag on his site to go along with the 100% free claim - not for us to speculate, but even if there was, there'd be no way we could prove he wasn't the author/copyright owner. There is a guy on Linked-in with the same name who produces tv commercials, so it might be him. I just sent him an email to find out, but I'm not optimistic. ^{Atsme📞📧} 02:26, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 12:34, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Hannabarberameeting.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No information on original source or explanation of how this is public domain. —innotata 08:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:John F. Kennedy, Kathleen Kennedy, George H. Mead and others, at Charleston, South Carolina, 1942.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photographer and first publication are unknown, so whether this photo is public domain cannot be determined. Being held by NARA does not always imply being public domain. —innotata 08:44, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Luis Munoz Marin postage stamp 1990.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Post-1978 US postage stamps are copyrighted and this dates to 1990. —innotata 08:46, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Map of Green Zone, Metro Vancouver LRSP, 1999.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed to be exempt from copyright but neither maps nor works of government are exempt from copyright in Canada. —innotata 08:48, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - http://www.metrovancouver.org/_layouts/15/WopiFrame.aspx?sourcedoc=/PublicationsMetro/CopyrightNoticeDisclaimer.pdf&action=default makes it pretty clear this material is copyrighted. -- Whpq (talk) 17:36, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 12:34, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Map of Hinthada District.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Burmese government works are copyright for 50 years after creation, see commons:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory#Burma —innotata 08:50, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Stephie.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) A file with this name on Commons is now visible. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal image, so out of scope. I will also note that I consider the content of the image to be questionable. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 12:35, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Amritsarairport9.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: speedy delete. F9 Ronhjones ^(Talk) 16:50, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected copyright violation - the sky has been taken from https://www.exprimeviajes.com/increible-vuelos-a-hawaii-por-383-euros/ Batternut (talk) 11:05, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as a copyvio. Image was tweeted from the airport's official twitter feed on June 9. --Whpq (talk) 11:16, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Vivariatower56.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: speedy delete. F9 Ronhjones ^(Talk) 16:56, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright vio of image at https://www.99acres.com/4-bhk-bedroom-apartment-flat-for-sale-in-k-raheja-vivarea-agripada-mumbai-south-4280-sq-ft-spid-P37383691?pos=SEARCH Batternut (talk) 11:34, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Robert Mangold's acrylic and pencil 'X Within X Orange', 1981.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2018 July 20. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:45, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Robert Mangold's acrylic and pencil 'X Within X Orange', 1981.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:'Red Canvas' by Richard Tuttle, 1967, Corcoran Gallery of Art.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: no consensus. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:45, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive non-free use, including galleries. Not all uses satisfy the contextual significance criterion. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:16, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and all those visual art images below...Modernist (talk) 13:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Amanda (aka DQ) 09:08, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Vague nomination rationale and an equally vague keep argument; are there any policy- or guideline-based arguments in favour of or against any specific use?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:42, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Richard Diebenkorn's painting 'Ocean Park No.129'.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2018 July 20. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:45, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Richard Diebenkorn's painting 'Ocean Park No.129'.jpg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Oldnav.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Keep under current license. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:46, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This was at one point tagged as having an OTRS confirmation, but that tag was seemingly removed. FFD refferal as a 1921 postcard isn't necessarily out of copyright in the UK. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:26, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It has OTRS permission - as it needed it before being awarded Featured Article status. But if you want to ruin the article - then fine, go ahead. == Myosotis Scorpioides (talk) 17:01, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A postcard from 1921 would probably fall under PD-1923-abroad unless it was pulished years later, which is unlikely.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep public domain in the United States as it was postmarked before 1923 and postcards were considered to published works at the time. If there's no statement of authorship on it, I assume it's public domain in the UK as well but all we need on English Wikipedia is for it to be public domain in the US. —innotata 15:41, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:SIHM logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2018 July 20. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:46, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:SIHM logo.png (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Prisoner Weeknd Art.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, non official. ⠀^TOMÁSTOMÁS_TOMÁS⠀TALK⠀ 15:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Tell Your Friends Art.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, non official. ⠀^TOMÁSTOMÁS_TOMÁS⠀TALK⠀ 15:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Artist's depiction of al-Jahith on a Qatar postage stamp.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Needs documentation that Qatari stamps are not copyrighted. —innotata 16:11, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:1956-57 Dalmatinac players.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is dated to 1956. Photographs with an unknown creator are only public domain in Australia if taken before 1955, and are copyrighted in the United States unless taken before 1946 - see Template:PD-Australia. —innotata 16:15, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Arturo P. Alcaraz.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Works of the Philippine government are indeed public domain, see commons:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory#The_Philippines. However, it isn't clear whether this photo was made by the Philippine government or simply reused by them. —innotata 16:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Brent Portrait.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Being 30 years old does not make a photo public domain. This very much remains copyrighted. —innotata 16:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Bunnaloo Football Club logo.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Relicense as non-free. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:47, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely copyrightable and dating to the 1980s, so automatically copyrighted globally. Might qualify for non-free use. —innotata 16:32, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relicense to non-free logo and add a fair use. Salavat (talk) 12:37, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Dadra and Nagar Haveli map.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not exempt from copyright as stated. There are several alternative, freely licensed maps that can be used, see commons:Category:Maps of Dadra and Nagar Haveli. —innotata 16:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Dimmitt meteorite.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Impossible for copyright to have expired on a work from 10 years ago. —innotata 16:44, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

source indicates that image was copyright protected from 1994-2017. Samisles (talk) 16:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- That's not what that means, it's just a reassertion of copyright. —innotata 17:04, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - invalid public domain reasoning. -- Whpq (talk) 17:26, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Deakin Duck shield.png[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dating to the 1990s, so automatically copyrighted globally upon creation. Orphaned. —innotata 16:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with questionable licensing. Salavat (talk) 12:37, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Kairat Abdrakhmanov.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stated to be a Kazakhstani government photo, EXIF says it's a UN photo. Either way, this isn't automatically public domain. Does not qualify for non-free use. —innotata 16:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - EXIF makes it very clear this is a UN photo. The UN photo guidelines make it abundantly clear that this image is not under a free license. -- Whpq (talk) 17:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Tamsinastorlecture.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This image was claimed originally as non-free and vaguely sourced to Facebook with no specific URL provided. When tagged as not having a fair use rationale to justify its use, the uploader claimed to be the copyright holder and declared it public domain. Proper sourcing and OTRS confirmation would be needed. Image was previously used a promo photo as seen in this google cache from 5 Jul 2018 21:45:52 GMT which predates this upload. Whpq (talk) 17:14, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, orphaned with no obvious value. Salavat (talk) 12:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Phoenix Science Center in Downtown Phoenix.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not explained how this is public domain - works of a 'public organization' are not automatically PD. —innotata 18:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - invalid public domain reasoning -- Whpq (talk) 17:27, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Campus map of Holy Angel University.jpg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: Delete; deleted by Fastily (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely eligible for copyright and no indication it is free to use. —innotata 18:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Flag of the Torres Strait Islanders.svg[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the media below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was: relisted on 2018 July 20. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:49, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of the Torres Strait Islanders.svg (delete | talk | history | links | logs)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the media's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.